janno
18th June 2007, 14:36
Over here in Queensland, you can get your full bike licence straight away if you've had your car licence for more than three years. (One day course for the two fifty, one day course for the full, bobs your auntie.)::yes: :
Interestingly, the largest group killing themselves on the road are the men in their 40's returning to riding after a long break (say 10 - 15 years) and getting a 1000cc plus bike.:dodge:
I'm curious about what other people think. Does limiting new riders to the smaller bikes save lives? In the UK don't you have to ride a teeny tiny bike for a million years before you get your full licence? What about the older ones coming back - how can you legislate if they need retesting or not without turning the place in to (more of) a Nazi state?
My history is - Yamaha virago, lasted three months on that before I was ready to give the damn thing away. :nono: That was because I found the riding style heinously uncomfortable and it was such a tiny bike for the touring I ended up getting keen on.
Then Suzuki SV650 - physically the wrong bike for me. I was as happy as a clam as long as I was going more than 25km or the petrol tank was half empty. Too top heavy for my skill level at that time.:innocent:
Then Honda NT650 - just the right size, plenty of grunt and torque, and after a year on that I'm ready for bigger, though the finances'll be struggling on that one for quite a while.
In my opinion, once you've mastered how to "operate" a motorcycle, the real learning begins, and you are safer on a 400 - 650cc bike as opposed to a light and buzzy 250cc. I'm really interested in what others think on this matter, because I'm conscious that my three years riding is basically just out of nappies.:baby:
I have to add that the other half has taught me to ride and mentored me the whole way. He has been riding for over thirty years and is a very clean and smooth rider with plenty of road smarts. After talking to friends who have learned through a course then been out there on their own, I'm thinking having someone at home to continually monitor you and act as a sounding board is invaluable.:2thumbsup
Jan.
Interestingly, the largest group killing themselves on the road are the men in their 40's returning to riding after a long break (say 10 - 15 years) and getting a 1000cc plus bike.:dodge:
I'm curious about what other people think. Does limiting new riders to the smaller bikes save lives? In the UK don't you have to ride a teeny tiny bike for a million years before you get your full licence? What about the older ones coming back - how can you legislate if they need retesting or not without turning the place in to (more of) a Nazi state?
My history is - Yamaha virago, lasted three months on that before I was ready to give the damn thing away. :nono: That was because I found the riding style heinously uncomfortable and it was such a tiny bike for the touring I ended up getting keen on.
Then Suzuki SV650 - physically the wrong bike for me. I was as happy as a clam as long as I was going more than 25km or the petrol tank was half empty. Too top heavy for my skill level at that time.:innocent:
Then Honda NT650 - just the right size, plenty of grunt and torque, and after a year on that I'm ready for bigger, though the finances'll be struggling on that one for quite a while.
In my opinion, once you've mastered how to "operate" a motorcycle, the real learning begins, and you are safer on a 400 - 650cc bike as opposed to a light and buzzy 250cc. I'm really interested in what others think on this matter, because I'm conscious that my three years riding is basically just out of nappies.:baby:
I have to add that the other half has taught me to ride and mentored me the whole way. He has been riding for over thirty years and is a very clean and smooth rider with plenty of road smarts. After talking to friends who have learned through a course then been out there on their own, I'm thinking having someone at home to continually monitor you and act as a sounding board is invaluable.:2thumbsup
Jan.